Think I'm being taken to court for parking in my own space - what do I do next?

Le_Kirk

ADR = alternative dispute resolution
These days a court hearing is likely to be over telephone or maybe video.

Coupon-mad

The Google definition of ADR will help you more than me telling you here.

Hearings are done over the phone now, thanks to Covid, and most people here don't end up with any hearing as PPCs tend to discontinue in the end.  If it's Gladstones, they are/were reportedly being investigated by the SRA this year and are currently often not even sending a rep to phone hearings, giving Defendants the floor, so to speak!

You can be so proud of your stance against parking scams.  You will be even more proud of yourself and have gained a huge amount as a life lesson once you see this threat off and can tell family and friends how you beat a solicitor represented firm as a matter of principle.

KeithP

Mirandoch said:

What does ADR mean?

Sticking those letters into Google reveals...
www.gov.uk/government/publications/alternative-dispute-resolution-for-consumers/alternative-dispute-resolution-for-consumers

Mirandoch

Coupon-mad said:

Google definition if ADR will help you more than me telling you here.

Hearings are done over the phone now, thanks to Covid, and most people here don't end up with any hearing as PPCs tend to discontinue in the end.  If it's Gladstones, they are/were reportedly being investigated by the SRA this year and are currently often not even sending a rep to phone hearings, giving Defendants the floor, so to speak!

You can be so proud of your stance against parking scams.  You will be even more proud of yourself and have gained a huge amount as a life lesson once you see this threat off and can tell family and friends how you beat a solicitor represented firm as a matter of principle.

Thanks so much! I'm glad I posted here now  

I'll probably take a break for the rest of today - I assume nobody's going to be working over the weekend anyway. But tomorrow I'll send the SAR request to UKPCM and email to Gladstones, and get the ball rolling. 

D_P_Dance

I'm just terrified of going to court. 

It is a county court, a room, a table,  a judge in a suit,  Google it and watch a video. You will be surprised how ordinary it all is.



 

Umkomaas

Mirandoch said:

Thank you folks! 

I'm just terrified of going to court. Never done it before. The thought of speaking before a judge makes me want to crawl into a hole and never come out. 

Have a look at this if you've not previously seen it - originally posted by forum regular @KeithP.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n93eoaxhzpU

1505grandad

A heads-up:-

"But tomorrow I'll send the SAR request to UKPCM......"  -  Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd?

Make sure you send it to the correct parking company  -  earlier you posted;-

"PS: It's UKCPM by the way."  -  UK Car Park Management Ltd

fimacdoodle

Court is not so bad.often companies fail to show up.
But as already said, Do NOT ignore it. Take defensive action and get writing back.
I have been at homes where bailiffs arrive, spout rubbish, and seize goods - and it is not a pretty sight.

Fruitcake

Mirandoch said:

Thanks folks. 

So if I've read the sticky correctly, I have to send a SAR request to the parking company and an email to the solicitors? The SAR request seems simple enough, but I am out of my depth with the solicitor. 

I've dug out my lease and taken a look. The only relevant bit I can find is this: "3. The Tenant agrees: 3.13 (i)  To park vehicles only in garages or designated parking spaces."  Nothing about who actually owns the space. So I had a look at my housing association's website. That has a small section on parking control and permits, which is this:

Most estates have some kind of control in place to ensure residents can park where they’re allowed to.

Some estates have a security gate to an enclosed car-park which will require a fob or key, or more rarely a code to be able to access the area. You will have been provided with this information when you moved in.

Most others have an open parking area with the requirement to clearly display a permit.

If you’re not sure, you can check whether there are warning signs displayed on the entry to the parking area or around the car-park.

Home owners and tenants can check with their housing officer or property manager for further information.

Doesn't sound like the housing association will be on my side. 

PS: As angry as I am about the whole thing, I don't feel comfortable jumping straight to complaining, especially as I do not really know what I am talking about. My main concern right now is to just get the parking company off my back and drop the charges. After that I may consider a more formal complaint to my housing association about predatory private parking companies. 

Whilst the HA website mentions the requirement to clearly display a permit, there is no mention of what happens if you don't display one, no mention of parking companies, no mention of parking charge notices, no mention of having to pay an unregulated parking company, and no mention of court claims.
A demand for payment to use a parking space that you already have a right to use, and a court claim all fall outside the terms of your lease and the terms/information on the HA website.

You should be giving the HA a good hammering. You displayed a permit as a curtesy even though it is not a requirement of your lease, which is a legally binding contract.

By law your lease cannot be changed or varied without a ballot of all parties (tenants and landlords) being held in accordance with Part IV Variation of Leases, Section 37 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987. There must be a majority in favour of the change and the maximum number of votes against must not be exceeded as defined by the Act.

Ask the HA when (not if) a ballot was carried out in accordance with the above Act, what was the result, when and how tenants were informed of the change, and what legal right the PPC has to make a court claim against you. A failure to do any of the above would constitute a derogation of grant (taking away something you already have by right).

L & T Act 1987

Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 (legislation.gov.uk)

Section 37 of the Act

Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 (legislation.gov.uk)

37Application by majority of parties for variation of leases.

(1)Subject to the following provisions of this section, an application may be made to [F1the appropriate tribunal] in respect of two or more leases for an order varying each of those leases in such manner as is specified in the application.

(2)Those leases must be long leases of flats under which the landlord is the same person, but they need not be leases of flats which are in the same building, nor leases which are drafted in identical terms.

(3)The grounds on which an application may be made under this section are that the object to be achieved by the variation cannot be satisfactorily achieved unless all the leases are varied to the same effect.

(4)An application under this section in respect of any leases may be made by the landlord or any of the tenants under the leases.

(5)Any such application shall only be made if—

(a)in a case where the application is in respect of less than nine leases, all, or all but one, of the parties concerned consent to it; or

(b)in a case where the application is in respect of more than eight leases, it is not opposed for any reason by more than 10 per cent. of the total number of the parties concerned and at least 75 per cent. of that number consent to it.

(6)For the purposes of subsection (5)—

(a)in the case of each lease in respect of which the application is made, the tenant under the lease shall constitute one of the parties concerned (so that in determining the total number of the parties concerned a person who is the tenant under a number of such leases shall be regarded as constituting a corresponding number of the parties concerned); and

(b)the landlord shall also constitute one of the parties concerned.

At every opportunity in ever correspondence from this moment on with the HA, PPC, and their solicitors, state that you have an existing right to park as stated in your lease, no and variation of lease has ever been approved, and therefore the claim is completely without merit. 

D_P_Dance

In a case where a HA owns 50% of the property or more, is it not the case that paragraph 37 requirements are not applicable?. 

Have you read this

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6242993/court-report-brentford-telephone-ukpc-roasted/p1